Twelfth Bough

i run my own damn think tank

Archive for category Obama/Biden

you are here: in the garden

Oct 11

Posted by A. Peasant in Language & Meaning, Mind Control, Obama/Biden, Religion, Symbolism | No Comments

AP image

Below you can read the Passion Narrative According to John, which is traditionally chanted on Good Friday services in the Catholic Church. Some People think this narrative is anti-Jewish because it seems to accuse the Jews of killing Jesus. If you read the narrative, however, you will see that the Jews indeed had Jesus killed, which is why the narrative seems to accuse them of said murder, though they used Roman proxies to do the deed. Anyway, this “perception” has caused such a furor over the years that it had to be addressed in the Vatican II document Nostra Aetate to absolve “The Jews” for the death of Christ.

“Even though the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ, neither all Jews indiscriminately at that time, nor Jews today, can be charged with the crimes committed during his passion. It is true that the Church is the new people of God, yet the Jews should not be spoken of as rejected or accursed as if this followed from holy Scripture.”

[http://www.jfrankhenderson.com/pdf/goodfridaypassion.pdf]

This sentiment is usually expressed today as “Not All Jews…” For instance, not all Jews believe we should attack Iran; and not all Jews think the settlements should be expanded, etc. Naturally. And what of it? Doesn’t the “not all…” caveat hold for any group? Not all American school children believe in Santa Claus, but enough do. Enough believe that lie to justify an annual consumer orgy bloodbath allegedly to celebrate Jesus’ birth. And the children who know that Santa is a lie are expected not to let on so as not to ruin the fun for their little friends, or even more bizarrely, for their parents, who often just love the whole charade. I mean, if everyone knew the truth they might have to get real with their expectations. What fun is that?

You don’t need all, you only need enough. There are enough. {http://tinyurl.com/yfsmbk7} But the “not all” category creates a very convenient safety zone. Whenever “the Jews” as a tribe are accused of collective bad behavior, any single Jew can immediately fragment the tribe by claiming that not all Jews are responsible, diverting your wrath to those (unspecified) bad Jews over there. And not all are responsible basically means, in practice, that none are responsible, because those good Jews who supposedly disagree with the tribe on any particular issue are never expected to actually disavow the tribe and forego the tribe’s many benefits. That would be unreasonable. Perish the thought. The tribe has no real fault lines which are deep enough to fragment it. Any and all fragmentations are purely temporary and automatic, like an animal defense mechanism, and will seamlessly disappear once the danger has passed. On the contrary, it’s very useful for some amount of disagreement to always persist among Jewry because it allows them to play monkey in the middle with non-Jews forever and ever. They even have an expression for this, three Jews four opinions, which is supposed to be funny ha ha. Do you get it? Nobody is actually ever responsible for the fourth opinion. It just gets passed around like a hot potato until some whack-job like Bibi or the settlers hold it, and then Bibi and the settlers become the hot potato but nothing ever really gets done about them because the Jews know they’re providing a valuable service to the tribe by being the bad Jews over there, thereby allowing everyone else to look good by comparison. It’s a game, a game the Catholic Church very helpfully officials.

So here’s the story of what happened to Jesus according to John:

When Jesus had spoken these words, he went forth with his disciples across the Kidron valley, where there was a garden, which he and his disciples entered. Now Judas, who betrayed him, also knew the place; for Jesus often met there with his disciples. So Judas, procuring a band of soldiers and some officers from the chief priests and the Pharisees, went there with lanterns and torches and weapons. Then Jesus, knowing all that was to befall him, came forward and said to them, “Whom do you seek?” They answered him, “Jesus of Nazareth.” Jesus said to them, “I am he.” Judas, who betrayed him, was standing with them. When he said to them, “I am he,” they drew back and fell to the ground. Again he asked them, “Whom do you seek?” And they said, “Jesus of Nazareth.” Jesus answered, “I told you that I am he; so if you seek me, let these men go.” This was to fulfil the word which he had spoken, “of those whom thou gavest me I lost not one.” Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it and struck the high priest’s slave and cut off his right ear. The slave’s name was Malchus. Jesus said to Peter, “Put your sword into its sheath; shall I not drink the cup which the Father has given me?”

So the band of soldiers and their captain and the officers of the Jews seized Jesus and bound him. First they led him to Annas; for he was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, who was high priest that year. It was Caiaphas who had given counsel to the Jews that it was expedient that one man should die for the people.

Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did another disciple. As this disciple was known to the high priest, he entered the court of the high priest along with Jesus, while Peter stood outside at the door. So the other disciple, who was known to the high priest, went out and spoke to the man who kept the door and brought Peter in. The maid who kept the door said to Peter, “Are not you also one of this man’s disciples?” He said, “I am not.” Now the servants and the officers had made a charcoal fire, because it was cold, and they were standing and warming themselves; Peter also was with them, standing and warming himself.

The high priest then questioned Jesus about his disciples and his teaching. Jesus answered him, “I have spoken openly to the world; I have always taught in the synagogues and in the temple, where all Jews come together; I have said nothing secretly. Why do you ask me? Ask those who have heard me, what I said to them; they know what I said.” When he had said this, one of the officers standing by struck Jesus with his hand, saying, “Is that how you answer the high priest?” Jesus answered him, “If I have spoken wrongly, bear witness to the wrong; but if I have spoken rightly, why do you strike me?” Annas then sent him bound to Caiaphas the high priest.

Now Simon Peter was standing and warming himself. They said to him, “Are not you also one of his disciples?” He denied it and said, “I am not.” One of the servants of the high priest, a kinsman of the man whose ear Peter had cut off, asked, “Did I not see you in the garden with him?” Peter again denied it; and at once the cock crowed.

Then they led Jesus from the house of Caiaphas to the praetorium. It was early. They themselves did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the Passover. So Pilate went out to them and said, “What accusation do you bring against this man?” They answered him, “If this man were not an evildoer, we would not have handed him over.” Pilate said to them, “Take him yourselves and judge him by your own law.” The Jews said to him, “it is not lawful for us to put any man to death.” This was to fulfil the word which Jesus had spoken to show by what death he was to die.

Pilate entered the praetorium again and called Jesus, and said to him, “Are you the King of the Jews?” Jesus answered, “do you say this of your own accord, or did others say it to you about me?” Pilate answered, “Am I a Jew?” Your own nation and the chief priests have handed you over to me; what have you done?” Jesus answered, “My kingship is not of this world; if my kingship were of this world, my servants would fight, that I might not be handed over to the Jews; but my kingship is not from the world.” Pilate said to him, “So you are a king?” Jesus answered, “You say that I am a king. For this I was born, and for this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth. Every one who is of the truth hears my voice.” Pilate said to him, “What is truth?”

After he had said this, he went out to the Jews again, and told them, “I find no crime in him. But you have a custom that I should release one man for you at the Passover; will you have me release for you the King of the Jews?” They cried out again, “Not this man, but Barabbas!” Now Barabbas was a robber.

Then Pilate took Jesus and scourged him. And the soldiers plaited a crown of thorns, and put it on his head, and arrayed him in a purple robe; they came up to him, saying, “Hail, King of the Jews!” and struck him with their hands. Pilate went out again, and said to them, “See, I am bringing him out to you, that you may know that I find no crime in him.” So Jesus came out, wearing the crown of thorns, and the purple robe. Pilate said to them, “Behold the man!” When the chief priests and the officers saw him, they cried out, “Crucify him, crucify him!” Pilate said to them, “take him yourselves and crucify him, for I find no crime in him.” The Jews answered him, “we have a law, and by that law he ought to die, because he has made himself the Son of God.”

When Pilate heard these words, he was the more afraid; he entered the praetorium again and said to Jesus, “Where are you from?” But Jesus gave no answer. Pilate therefore said to him, “You will not speak to me? Do you not know that I have power to release you, and power to crucify you?” Jesus answered him, “You would have no power over me unless it had been given you from above; therefore he who delivered me to you has the greater sin.”

Upon this Pilate sought to release him, but the Jews cried out, “If you release this man, you are not Caesar’s friend; everyone who makes himself a king sets himself against Caesar.” When Pilate heard these words, he brought Jesus out and sat down on the judgment seat at a place called The Pavement, and in Hebrew, Gabbatha. Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover; it was about the sixth hour. He said to the Jews, “Behold your King!” They cried out “Away with him, away with him, crucify him!” Pilate said to them, “Shall I crucify your king?” The chief priests answered, “We have no King but Caesar.” Then he handed him over to them to be crucified.

So they took Jesus, and he went out, bearing his own cross, to the place called the place of a skull, which is called in Hebrew Golgotha. There they crucified him, and with him two others, one on either side, and Jesus between them. Pilate also wrote a title and put it on the cross; it read, “Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.” Many of the Jews read this title, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city; and it was written in Hebrew, in Latin, and in Greek. The chief priests of the Jews then said to Pilate, “Do not write, ‘The King of the Jews,’ but, ‘This man said, I am the King of the Jews.’” Pilate answered, “What I have written I have written.”

When the four soldiers had crucified Jesus they took his garments and made four parts, one for each soldier; also his tunic. But the tunic was without seam, woven from top to bottom; so they said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it shall be.” This was to fulfil the scripture, “They parted my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots.” So the soldiers did this.

But standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing near, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold, your son!” Then he said to the disciple, “Behold your mother!” And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home.

After this Jesus, knowing that all was finished, said (to fulfil the scripture), “I thirst.” A bowl full of vinegar stood there; so they put a sponge full of the vinegar on hyssop and held it to his mouth. When Jesus had received the vinegar, he said, “It is finished”: and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.

Since it was the day of Preparation, in order to prevent the bodies from remaining on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first, and of the other who had been crucified with him: but when they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water. He who saw it has borne witness—his testimony is true, and he knows that he tells the truth—that you also may believe. For these things took place that the scripture might be fulfilled, “Not a bone of him shall be broken.” And again another scripture says, “They shall look on him who they have pierced.”

After this Joseph of Arimathea, who was a disciple of Jesus, but secretly, for fear of the Jews, asked Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus, and Pilate gave him leave. So he came and took away his body. Nicodemus also, who had at first come to him by night, came bringing a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pound’s weight. They took the body of Jesus, and bound it in linen cloths with spices, as is the burial custom of the Jews. Now in the place where he was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb where no one had ever been laid. So because of the Jewish day of Preparation, as the tomb was close at hand, they laid Jesus there.

John 18:1-19:42

So here’s a little thought experiment. If Obama played the role of Jesus, the Prince of Peace, in the passion reenactment, who would play the following roles:

Judas
Simon Peter
Malchus
Annas
Caiaphas
Pilate
Barabbas
Caesar
Mary the mother of Jesus
Mary Magdalene
Joseph of Arimathea

That’s a nice picture of Obama in the Rose Garden, don’t you think? It’s a classic.

And by the way, it was “inevitable” according to Howard Fineman, leading Jewish opinion shaper for Newsweek.

In the rose garden last Friday, Barack Obama, with a deep sense of humility and in the name of all mankind, reluctantly accepted the Nobel Peace Prize committee’s decision proclaiming him president of planet Earth. He will be sworn in at a glittering ceremony in Oslo in December….OK, I’m joking. Obama isn’t going to be sworn in as planetary president. But it doesn’t matter; in his mind, he already is. From the time he announced his candidacy, his appeal—and his sense of himself—has been global…For one of his first major speeches, he flew to Cairo, offering himself as a human bridge between the West and Islam in an event that had the aura of a Second Inaugural Address, this one aimed at the whole world…In office for a mere nine months, Obama is now a full-blown “ism.” And Obamaism—the idea that there must be shared global responsibility for virtually every problem we face—makes some obvious sense….But the president had better be careful…The bigger risk for Obama is personal. No one in recent decades has come into office with such high—perhaps dangerously high—expectations…To be sure, he tried to be humble in the Rose Garden.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/217096

Yeah, he’s *not* going to be sworn in as planetary president. And it doesn’t matter. He’s already there in his mind, Howard Fineman informs us.

Mind control?

Update: Oh, ha. You thought it was just *me* being wacky.

he got the prize for being a good NWO tool

Oct 9

Posted by A. Peasant in NWO, Obama/Biden, Symbolism | No Comments

“I don’t want any foreigners building roads or big buildings for me when I am cleaning blood from my home.” - Haji Dawood Khan, a shopkeeper in Helmand Province, Afghanistan, explains why sending more U.S. troops to his country would not be helpful.

source

Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize to mixed reviews
By Wojciech Moskwa

OSLO (Reuters) - U.S. President Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday for giving the world “hope for a better future” and striving for nuclear disarmament, in a surprise award that drew both warm praise and sharp criticism.

The decision to bestow one of the world’s top accolades on a president less than nine months into his first term, who has yet to score a major foreign policy success, was greeted with gasps of astonishment from journalists at the announcement in Oslo.

The Norwegian Nobel Committee praised Obama for “his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.” But critics — especially in parts of the Arab and Muslim world — called its decision premature.

Obama’s press secretary woke him with the news before dawn and the president felt “humbled” by the award, a senior administration official said.

When told in an email from Reuters that many people around the world were stunned by the announcement, Obama’s senior adviser, David Axelrod, responded: “As are we.”

The first African-American to hold his country’s highest office, Obama, 48, has called for disarmament and worked to restart the stalled Middle East peace process since taking office in January.

“Very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future,” the committee said in a citation.

While the decision won praise from statesmen like Nelson Mandela and Mikhail Gorbachev, both former Nobel laureates, it was also attacked in some quarters as hasty and undeserved.

The Palestinian Islamist movement Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip and opposes a peace treaty with Israel, said the award was premature at best.

“Obama has a long way to go still and lots of work to do before he can deserve a reward,” said Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri. “Obama only made promises and did not contribute any substance to world peace. And he has not done anything to ensure justice for the sake of Arab and Muslim causes.”

“EMBARRASSING JOKE”

Issam al-Khazraji, a day laborer in Baghdad, said: “He doesn’t deserve this prize. All these problems — Iraq, Afghanistan — have not been solved…The man of ‘change’ hasn’t changed anything yet.”

Liaqat Baluch, a senior leader of the Jamaat-e-Islami, a conservative religious party in Pakistan, called the award an embarrassing “joke.”

But the chief Palestinian peace negotiator, Saeb Erekat, welcomed it and expressed hope that Obama “will be able to achieve peace in the Middle East.”

Nobel Committee Chairman Thorbjoern Jagland rejected suggestions from journalists that Obama was getting the prize too early, saying it recognized what he had already done over the past year.
“We hope this can contribute a little bit to enhance what he is trying to do,” he told a news conference.

The committee said it attached “special importance to Obama’s vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons,” saying he had “created a new climate in international politics.”

Without naming Obama’s predecessor George W. Bush, it highlighted the differences in America’s engagement with the rest of the world since the change of administration in January.

“Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play.

“Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts,” it said, and the United States was playing a more constructive role in tackling climate change.

Obama laid out his vision on eliminating nuclear arms in a speech in Prague in April. But he was not the first American president to set that goal, and acknowledged it might not be reached in his lifetime.

He is negotiating arms cuts with Russia, and last month dropped plans to base elements of a U.S. anti-missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic. Moscow had seen the scheme as a threat, despite U.S. assurances it was directed against Iran.

On other pressing issues, Obama is deliberating whether to send more troops to fight the Taliban in Afghanistan, and is still searching for breakthroughs on Iran’s disputed nuclear program and on Middle East peace.

Israel’s foreign minister said on Thursday there was no chance of a peace deal for many years. Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid told Reuters: “The Nobel prize for peace? Obama should have won ‘the Nobel Prize for escalating violence and killing civilians’.”

At home, Obama’s popularity is flagging under the pressure of rising unemployment and a divisive, sometimes bitter debate over his healthcare reform plans.

Abroad, he is still widely seen around the world as an inspirational figure.

Zimbabwean Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai, who had been tipped as a favorite for the prize, told Reuters that Obama was a deserving candidate and an “extraordinary example.”

Obama’s uncle Said Obama told Reuters by telephone from the president’s ancestral village of Kogelo in western Kenya: “It is humbling for us as a family and we share in Barack’s honor… we congratulate him.”

Obama is the third senior U.S. Democrat to win the prize this decade after former Vice President Al Gore won in 2007 along with the U.N. climate panel and Jimmy Carter in 2002.

The prize worth 10 million Swedish crowns ($1.4 million) will be handed over in Oslo on December 10.

(Additional reporting by Oslo newsroom, Kamran Haider in Pakistan, Mohammed Assadi, Nidal al-Mughrabi in Gaza; Mark Denge in Nairobi, Jason Webb in Spain; writing by Mark Trevelyan, editing by Janet McBride)

What a joke.

In March 2009, Israel’s nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu asked that his name be removed from the list of candidates for the Nobel Peace Prize because President Shimon Peres had received the award. That’s what a true peaceful man does, a man who is serious about peace and willingly pays the price for it. He tells the establishment to stick the prize up their collective ass, where it came from.

Update: See comments: This is possibly the kiss of death. Maybe Obama will play the messiah role in the big drama right to the bitter end.

is it the kiss of death?

Oct 9

Posted by A. Peasant in Injustice, Iran, Israel, NWO, Obama/Biden, Symbolism | No Comments

Obama gets a prize he clearly doesn’t deserve.

Journalists express shock.

The Nobel Committee rejects the criticism and notes that they hope the prize will “contribute a little bit to enhance what he is trying to do:” implement a globalist agenda of international cooperation and tackling climate change.

People quoted from Hamas, Iraq, Pakistan and the Taliban wryly observe that he “has not done anything to ensure justice for the sake of Arab and Muslim causes.”

His popularity at home has flagged under the bad economy and health care crisis.

But abroad, Obama is still widely regarded as inspirational.

“Foreigners” just love him. They would never do anything to hurt him. If anything happens to Obama it would *surely* be due to some angry American or Arab, the usual suspects, who resent Obama for selling them down the river. Right?

blink blink blink

Meanwhile, accepting the Nobel Peace Prize *does* make it a little harder to justify an attack on Iran. Theoretically. It leaves Israel somewhat isolated.

Winning the Nobel Prize for peace, of course, is likely to make it extremely difficult for President Obama to drop any of his new fifteen ton Grand Slam bombs on Iran.

The ball is now back in Israel’s court.

That could be problematic. Problems require solutions.

Poor Barack Obama. It’s too bad the shine has come off him just like Gideon Rachman said in the Financial Times: (via here: we are witnessing a psyops going bad)

After a little fumbling with the envelope, the head of the International Olympic Committee has just announced the venue for the 2016 Olympics – Rio de Janeiro. It all seems a confirmation of the mood of the moment – Brazil is deeply fashionable and on the way up; and the shine has come off Barack Obama, who turned up in person to lobby for Chicago – only to see his home town eliminated early.

Poor Obama, he really didn’t deserve this. I bet he now regrets going all the way to Copenhagen to lobby for Chicago. His great trump-card was meant to be his global popularity. But the International Olympic Committee had no trouble in brushing him aside. I’m afraid this is all going to play into the gathering conservative narrative in the US of Obamas a naive dupe, who grovels in front of foreigners – and gets nothing back in return. It seems to be setback after setback for the US president at the moment – health-care, Iran, the Afghanistan mess, unemployment up at nearly 10%.

As for Brazil – never has the country been so fashionable. The Brazilians are hosting the World Cup in 2014 and now the Olympics, two years later. They provide the first letter of the much-touted group of emerging economic superpowers - the BRICs. They are key members of the G20. In Lula, Brazil at last has a leader who is a recognised global figure. He gave the lead-off address at the UN General Assembly last week. (Just before Obama, symbolically enough.) And Brazil has also just discovered massive reserves of offshore oil. Oh lucky country!

I mean it’s nice that he won the Nobel Peace Prize and all. Maybe it’s sort of a consolation prize or booby prize. The better to lament him with my dears, hmm?

For additional reading, see aangirfan: the security services and assassinations.

UPDATE: Bonus Reasons Why Obama Should Be Worrying Now:

“Should a majority in this country come to their senses and wake up, they could do a Kennedy on this pretend Kennedy, sparking a real race war to occupy us in a big, big way.“

From this piece here: The Conspiracy Business and All That Jazz, posted at Snippits and Snappets. This is a really good piece that says everything I was trying to say in naive or paranoid? except he did a much, much better job.

UPDATE 2: via xymphora, David Frum confirms this is Definitely Problematic in Certain Circles:

Will Peace Prize handcuff President when time comes for an air strike?

Problems require solutions. It’s the Hegelian Way.

here comes the bus

Oct 6

Posted by A. Peasant in Brazil, China, Hasbara, Israel, NWO, Obama/Biden, Russia | No Comments

All of a sudden I’m noticing Brazil popping up everywhere. A star is born. I think his name is Lula. He’s a major South American suck-up.

Brazil’s Leader: Holocaust Must Never Be Denied
By Associated Press, Feb 3, 2007, Haaretz.com

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva joined Jewish leaders to mark the 62nd anniversary of the liberation of Nazi death camps, saying the Holocaust must never be denied and urging the world to prevent it from ever happening again. “In the 21st century we cannot accept the denial of the Holocaust as a historical fact…nor can we accept those who deny that six million Jews were massacred,” Silva told some 500 people at the Sao Paulo Jewish Congregation’s synagogue on Friday.“Each time we pay homage to the victims of the Holocaust, we strengthen those forces that will prevent that same horror from repeating itself,” he said after praising the United Nation’s General Assembly for last week’s approval of a resolution condemning the denial of the Holocaust. Silva’s remarks came at a ceremony held to commemorate the January 27, 1945 liberation and to mark the second International Holocaust Remembrance Day.

He did not specifically mention Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, but the congregation’s chief rabbi, Henry Sobel, said the Brazilian president’s presence at Friday’s event represented a repudiation of Ahmadinejad’s insistence that the Holocaust was a myth. Sobel also said he was concerned by what he called growing anti-Semitism in Venezuela. “President Hugo Chavez’s rhetoric is anti-Semitic and he is a close ally of the president of Iran, and both of them share a profound hatred of Israel,” Sobel said.

Chavez has cultivated friendly ties with Ahmadinejad and last year called Israeli attacks in Lebanon during a conflict with Hezbollah militants a new Holocaust. He has made other remarks criticized by some Jewish groups as anti-Semitic, though he said his comments were misinterpreted.

At about 130,000 strong, Brazil’s Jewish community is the second-largest in South America after Argentina, which is home to an estimated 200,000 Jews.

Fast forward two and a half years. This is Gideon Rachman writing in the Financial Times. This is the establishment speaking.

After a little fumbling with the envelope, the head of the International Olympic Committee has just announced the venue for the 2016 Olympics – Rio de Janeiro. It all seems a confirmation of the mood of the moment – Brazil is deeply fashionable and on the way up; and the shine has come off Barack Obama, who turned up in person to lobby for Chicago – only to see his home town eliminated early.

Poor Obama, he really didn’t deserve this. I bet he now regrets going all the way to Copenhagen to lobby for Chicago. His great trump-card was meant to be his global popularity. But the International Olympic Committee had no trouble in brushing him aside. I’m afraid this is all going to play into the gathering conservative narrative in the US of Obamas a naive dupe, who grovels in front of foreigners – and gets nothing back in return. It seems to be setback after setback for the US president at the moment – health-care, Iran, the Afghanistan mess, unemployment up at nearly 10%.

As for Brazil – never has the country been so fashionable. The Brazilians are hosting the World Cup in 2014 and now the Olympics, two years later. They provide the first letter of the much-touted group of emerging economic superpowers - the BRICs. They are key members of the G20. In Lula, Brazil at last has a leader who is a recognised global figure. He gave the lead-off address at the UN General Assembly last week. (Just before Obama, symbolically enough.) And Brazil has also just discovered massive reserves of offshore oil. Oh lucky country!

Oh “I bet” Gideon Rachman “is afraid” how this is all going to play out badly for Obama as the naive dupe GROVELING IN FRONT OF FOREIGNERS AND GETTING NOTHING IN RETURN.

OH MY GOD GIDEON YOU DIDN’T SPECIFY WHICH “FOREIGNERS”???? DO YOU MEAN… THE ONES THAT CAN’T BE NAMED?!?!???
DO YOU THINK THE US IS BEING SET UP FOR A BIG TAKE-DOWN?

Well I guess so.

In the most profound financial change in recent Middle East history, Gulf Arabs are planning – along with China, Russia, Japan and France – to end dollar dealings for oil, moving instead to a basket of currencies including the Japanese yen and Chinese yuan, the euro, gold and a new, unified currency planned for nations in the Gulf Co-operation Council, including Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi, Kuwait and Qatar.

Secret meetings have already been held by finance ministers and central bank governors in Russia, China, Japan and Brazil to work on the scheme, which will mean that oil will no longer be priced in dollars.

The plans, confirmed to The Independent by both Gulf Arab and Chinese banking sources in Hong Kong, may help to explain the sudden rise in gold prices, but it also augurs an extraordinary transition from dollar markets within nine years.

The Americans, who are aware the meetings have taken place – although they have not discovered the details – are sure to fight this international cabal which will include hitherto loyal allies Japan and the Gulf Arabs. Against the background to these currency meetings, Sun Bigan, China’s former special envoy to the Middle East, has warned there is a risk of deepening divisions between China and the US over influence and oil in the Middle East. “Bilateral quarrels and clashes are unavoidable,” he told the Asia and Africa Review. “We cannot lower vigilance against hostility in the Middle East over energy interests and security.

This sounds like a dangerous prediction of a future economic war between the US and China over Middle East oil – yet again turning the region’s conflicts into a battle for great power supremacy. China uses more oil incrementally than the US because its growth is less energy efficient. The transitional currency in the move away from dollars, according to Chinese banking sources, may well be gold. An indication of the huge amounts involved can be gained from the wealth of Abu Dhabi, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar who together hold an estimated $2.1 trillion in dollar reserves.

The decline of American economic power linked to the current global recession was implicitly acknowledged by the World Bank president Robert Zoellick. “One of the legacies of this crisis may be a recognition of changed economic power relations,” he said in Istanbul ahead of meetings this week of the IMF and World Bank. But it is China’s extraordinary new financial power – along with past anger among oil-producing and oil-consuming nations at America’s power to interfere in the international financial system – which has prompted the latest discussions involving the Gulf states.

Brazil has shown interest in collaborating in non-dollar oil payments, along with India. Indeed, China appears to be the most enthusiastic of all the financial powers involved, not least because of its enormous trade with the Middle East.

Blah blah blah, not a word breathed about ISRAEL in the whole thing. Just a lot of talk about what fucking assholes AMERICANS are.

But hey, do you know who has been running our country all this time? Israel! That’s right. The Jews are very very powerful in America. We are nothing but a giant puppet and we’ve been acting like a Giant Puppet Asshole. Now everyone hates us. Hey good job! Now the puppet is about to have the strings cut and fall lifeless to the stage, blamed for everything, and the puppet master is moving on.

robot says: danger will robinson

Oct 2

Posted by A. Peasant in Mind Control, Obama/Biden | No Comments

I apologize that you are subjected to an ad first, not sure how to fix that:

That is not normal.

from theory to practice

Sep 15

Posted by A. Peasant in Hasbara, Israel, Obama/Biden, Palestinians, Think Tanks | No Comments

I wrote this piece in January of this year:

Israel’s Security: An Idea Whose Time Will Never Come

And it’s long and involved because it’s about this convoluted paper written by Walter Russell Mead, the Henry A. Kissinger Senior Fellow for US Foreign Policy at the Council of Foreign Relations. The paper is called Change They Can Believe In: To Make Israel Safe, Give Palestinians Their Due.

http://tinyurl.com/8o9jg4

Foreign Policy’s Shorter: If it hopes to bring peace to the Middle East, the Obama administration must put Palestinian politics and goals first.

My Shorter: Let’s buy off the Palestinians and internationalize the problem without requiring Israel to make a real sacrifice.

Are you ready for another bailout? That’s what this CFR paper is all about: the US, the international community, and (Israel), paying the Palestinians off. And like all the other bailouts we’ve had crammed down our throats so far, this one, too, is a waste of US taxpayer money that will never work.

The incoming U.S. administration of Barack Obama faces a daunting task. It needs to develop a Middle East peace strategy that makes a clear break with the past, that is politically sustainable at home and abroad, that offers real hope for a final resolution, and that in the meantime can bring benefits to the two peoples, the wider region, and the United States itself. But Washington will have only limited options. American public opinion strongly and consistently favors a pro-Israel orientation for U.S. foreign policy, and Israel’s friends in the United States can mobilize broad support on short notice. Decades of intensive diplomacy and scholarship have already delineated the possible solutions to the dispute. The outlines of a settlement — regarding borders, security, refugees, and water rights — are reasonably well understood by all parties, and Obama cannot do much to change them.

[snip]

Obama. Of course. HE will acknowledge the horrible wrongs the Palestinians have suffered (by Israel), and HE will compensate them for those wrongs (done by Israel), and HE will ensure a dignified future for “every Palestinian family.” Brush your hands together now. This big mess will all be swept up shortly. But first, let us be clear about this injustice thing…

What the Palestinians want from peace is, first of all, an acknowledgment of the injustices they have suffered. Israeli and Palestinian scholars have documented many incidents during Israel’s War of Independence in which massacres or threats of violence caused Palestinians to flee. Most Palestinians who left their homes and villages to protect themselves and their families were never allowed to return, and much of their property was confiscated by the new Israeli government. It is not a crime for civilians to flee combat, and international law recognizes the right of such people to return to their homes. Enforcing that right has been a centerpiece of U.S. policy in Bosnia, so why, the Palestinians ask, should they be treated any differently? This is a legitimate grievance, and the United States must lead the international community in reckoning with it fully and frankly. Any diplomatic effort hoping to build a secure peace with the Palestinians’ support must address this issue.

That said, it would be as unfair to place all responsibility for the Palestinian refugee problem on Israel as it is to overlook the injustices the Palestinians suffered. The Israelis argue that the War of Independence was a fight for survival: here were survivors from Hitler’s death camps suddenly facing not only the Palestinians but also the armies of five Arab states. Self-defense, the Israelis argue, justified their actions during and after the war. And although most Israelis acknowledge that wrongs were committed, almost all charge that, faced with similar choices, their critics would have done the same or worse. They are right. The responsibility for the nakba cannot simply be laid at Israel’s door.

Do you have that? Do you get it? It’s not Israel’s fault!! They HAD to kill those Palestinians!! It was SELF-DEFENSE when they ethnically cleansed all those villages!!! YOU WOULD HAVE DONE THE SAME THING, they insist!!! And what does Mr. Mead say, “They are right.” It is just as simple as that. He just takes every self-serving excuse for Israel’s crimes and accepts them. That is why he gets paid the big bucks at CFR. And that’s how the US foreign policy establishment works. Whatever Israel wants, Israel gets. A little acknowledgment from Israel, and everybody else pays up.

And so forth.

Lo and behold. I remembered it upon seeing this today:

By Haitham Sabbah

A draft of the Obama peace plan, which is expected to be released at the UN Assembly meeting in New York, or at the G-20 Summit in Pittsburgh, has surfaced.

The International Middle East Media Center’s website leaked the alleged draft of Obama’s peace plan given to them by Palestinian Legislator Hasan Khreisha. Khreisha added that the draft has been widely distributed among Palestinian and Arab leaders and the Egyptian President, Hosni Mubarak, recently discussed the plan during his visit to the White House.

According to Khreisha, the draft includes ten main points detailed as follows:

1. International presence in the Jordan Valley, Palestinian Plains area, and other areas in the West Bank.

2. Annexing some parts of East Jerusalem to remain under Israeli control, while Muslim holy site would be under Arab control.

3. All Palestinian factions would be dissolved and transformed into political parties.

4. Large settlement blocs in the West Bank would remain under Israeli control, while negotiations would be conducted within three months of the plan agreement?, to discuss the future of smaller settlements.

5. Several areas in the West Bank would be disarmed, and Israeli would maintain aerial control.

6. Intensifying the Palestinian-Israeli security coordination.

7. The Palestinian Authority would not be allowed to have military alliances with regional countries.

8. The United States would guarantee the establishment of a Palestinian State in the summer of 2011.

9. Allowing an agreed upon number of refugees to return, and to be settled in the Plains area and other areas in the West Bank, particularly in the cities of Ramallah and Nablus. A special fund for supporting the refugees would also be established.

10. Israel starts releasing the Palestinian political detainees immediately after the peace deal is signed. Three years would be allocated for the release of the detainees.

I see an international presence. I see a special fund. I see US guarantees. I see Israel maintaining control. I see political limitations on the Palestinians.

And what does Israel sacrifice? Diddly-squat.

Check.

osama is a permanent limited hangout

Sep 14

Posted by A. Peasant in 9-11, CIA, Experts, Identities, Israel, Limited Hangouts, Media, Military, Mind-fucking, Obama/Biden, Terrorism | No Comments


Naturally we’ve just heard from the dead Osama bin Laden.*

*Osama bin Laden, as we all know (wink wink wink), is a notorious terrorist murderous mastermind who killed 3000 Americans in cold blood and got away with it, having miraculously outwitted capture by the best military in the world for eight years.

WASHINGTON - Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden told Americans in a new message Sunday that their support for Israel had the launch of the September 11, 2001 attacks, a US-based terror monitoring group said. Al-Qaeda’s As-Sahab media released a video titled “Message to the American People,” which features a still image of bin Laden and an audio statement, said IntelCenter. According to the center, Bin Laden said that among “some other injustices,” US support to Israel motivated Al-Qaeda to launch the 9/11 attacks. He also stated that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were driven by the pro-Israeli lobby in the White House and corporate interests, not Muslim militants. “If you think about your situation well, you will know that the White House is occupied by pressure groups,” he said, according to IntelCenter. “Rather than fighting to liberate Iraq - as Bush claimed - it (the White House) should have been liberated.” He was referring to former US president George W. Bush, who launched an invasion of Iraq in 2003. According to bin Laden, current US President Barack Obama is powerless to change the course of the wars. Obama’s retention of US Defense Secretary Robert Gates and other individuals from the Bush administration is confirmation of the president’s weakness, the Al-Qaeda chief argued. Bin Laden urges Americans to pressure White House leaders to cease the wars and US support to Israel, rather than succumb to “the ideological terrorism” exercised by neo-conservatives.

Well, here you have a recording of “bin Laden” (long-dead CIA asset Tim Osman) making some sense. He’s putting forth the main arguments that you will find at many truth sites on the internet. These arguments rest on solid facts, but since Osama bin Laden says them too, they are now totally discredited, are they not? The psyops goal being to link people who speak the truth about Israel with the notorious terrorist murderous mastermind Osama bin Laden.

But that’s not all! There’s much more psyops goodness here.

“The bitter truth is that the neo-conservatives continue to cast their heavy shadows upon you,” he said. If the wars are not ended, “all we will do is to continue the war of attrition against you on all possible axes, like we exhausted the Soviet Union for ten years until it collapsed with grace from God the Almighty and became a memory of the past,” bin Laden vowed.

Read “we” in the context that al Qaeda is a CIA creation, as the Muslim world knows, and you see what lies in store for us.

Observers say Bin Laden cited known facts and genuine Muslim grievances to regain fading support for his group. The Al-Qaeda leader, they add, has only sated [sic] the obvious to show that he is still sensitive to issues important to Muslims amid wide Arab and Islamic public displeasure of his violent methods.

But many Americans still don’t know that the CIA created al Qaeda. Here’s where the “analysts” can be so very, very useful in applying the mind-fuck.

His message, which analysts say is really directed at the Muslim world and not the American people as he said, will likely to fail in gaining any sympathy or support, as the Muslim peoples are not interested in his contribution to their just causes.

Aha. So, the notorious terrorist murderous mastermind bin Laden *says* his message is directed at the American people, but he is a known liar, and the analysts *know* he is a liar, so his message is really directed at the Muslim world, but he will FAIL, as everyone knows, because the Muslim world is not interested in his contribution to their just causes (because they know he’s a tool of the CIA, which, as everyone paying attention knows, is peopled with criminals).

Wrapping it up, we have the explanation of the timing, which you should know has absolutely nothing to do with the urgent pressure to bomb Israel’s arch-enemy Iran, as well as the enormous bounty on his head, which nobody will ever have to pay since they know exactly where he’s been all this time.

The release came two days after the United States marked the eighth anniversary of the Al-Qaeda-sponsored attacks, which killed nearly 3,000 people. IntelCenter said bin Laden typically releases such a statement annually around September or October. The last audiotape by bin Laden was released June 3. In that missive he scorned Obama’s overture to the Muslim world and warned of decades of conflict ahead. Bin Laden has a 50-million-dollar bounty on his head and has been in hiding for the past eight years. US intelligence officials say they believe the world’s most wanted man is hiding in either Pakistan or Afghanistan near the remote mountainous border between the two countries.

Oh those US intelligence officials. They say they believe, do they? Well, you know, talk is cheap.

fluff

Sep 9

Posted by A. Peasant in Hasbara, Obama/Biden | No Comments

This here is a fluffernutter sandwich on Wonder Bread about Obama’s Jewish roots in Chicago. Here, have a bite.

“He was raised in a family without any built-in advantages: His father was a stranger, but with the help of a close family and an emphasis on education and hard work, he succeeded. It’s the Jewish story in America.” - Alan Solow, Chicago attorney, leader of the Jewish community and veteran Obama supporter

Yes, Jewish people are practically Lost Boys from Sudan. That’s what I always say. No built-in advantages whatsoever.

The first is its annual list of what it calls The New Establishment, the 100 most powerful, most influential people in American society. What is absolutely amazing, stunning about the list is how many Jews there are on it. Jews make up about 2.5 percent of the U.S. population so there should be two or three Jews on the list. Guess again, bubeleh. The list of the Vanity Fair 100 includes, get ready, 51, yes 51 Jews. Minimum.

I say 51 because that’s how many I’m sure are Jewish. There may be others on the list who are Jewish but who I don’t know are Jewish and whose names are not obviously Jewish. But let’s say I got them all. That means that more than half the names on the list of the 100 people who are the most vital to this society are Jewish. And this is a list that includes Apple’s Steve Jobs and Oprah and Bill Clinton and Warren Buffett, to name a few of the few non-Jews on the list. That is absolutely nothing short of astounding.

Talk about us being accepted into this society, talk about us having power in this society, talk about anti-Semitism being a thing of the past, talk about Jews no longer needing to be afraid to be visible and influential. And it doesn’t stop there. The magazine also has a separate list of what it calls The Next Establishment, younger people it believes destined to make the big list some year soon. Of the 26 names on that list, 15 are Jews. That I’m sure of. 15 of 26. More than half.

So much more. Go finish your lunch.

No, I do not hear the fat lady singing.

Jan 29

Posted by Marlena in Iran, Israel, Military, NWO, Nuclear Weapons, Obama/Biden, Politics | No Comments

If Netanyahu wins the 2/10 Israeli elections, as seems likely, we can expect him to aggressively push forward the current (psychopathic) Israeli strategy of putting Iran in the crosshairs while systematically murdering the Palestinians and stealing more and more of their land. Now the question is: Will that work?

A very good interview here with a “former” CIA operative, Robert Baer, indicates that an attack on Iran is not possible.

IPS: Is the possibility of a limited attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities by Israel also out of question? Especially given what we learned in a recent New York Times article that last year, Israeli leaders asked President Bush to carry out such an attack, though the president did not accept.

RB: Totally out of the question. Even Bush understood this. The New York Times is right when it says that Bush vetoed an Israeli attack, simply because there is a balance of power in the Middle East between the U.S. and Iran, and it’s a fairly even balance of power. I mean not in terms of aircraft tanks or submarines, but in a monopoly of violence, there is equality.

Lord Stirling has outlined with bitter clarity the meaning of a War on Iran, and you can read all about that here if you wish. You are forewarned. It appears, at least, that our US military commanders have ’seen the light.’ But that does not mean Israel won’t do something totally stupid, for as we can all surmise, the Israelis have gone off the rails. As a matter of fact, Kuwait and some other unnamed countries in the Middle East, Asia and Europe have ordered large supplies of potassium iodide (ie: nukepills). So it’s not like we’re out of the woods.

But there’s a new twist (new to me anyway). Netanyahu and the Clintons don’t get along, going way back to the Monica Lewinsky scandal, which so happened to be under Netanyahu’s Likud government. Here’s the full text of a story from September, 1998 in The New Federalist: What Was the Mossad Role in the Lewinski Affair? by Edward Spannaus, captured at WhatReallyHappened:

According to a little-noticed passage in the Starr Report, during March 1997, President Clinton told Monica Lewinsky that he suspected a foreign embassy was tapping his telephone conversations.Nothing more is said in the report about the incident, but according to information received by this news service, that reference could provide the key to the entire Lewinsky scandal and to the setting-up and entrapment of the President. Reportedly, the embassy involved was that of Israel, under the control of the right-wing Likud government of Benjamin Netanyahu.

First, the time-frame of the Lewinsky affair should be taken into account. It is bounded by two events: (1) the assassination of President Clinton’s partner in the Middle East peace process, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzak Rabin, on Nov. 4, 1995, which opens the path for Netanyahu becoming Prime Minister in May 1996; and (2) Netanyahu’s visit to Washington in mid-January 1998–just as the Lewinsky affair was breaking in the U.S. news media. On this visit, Netanyahu publicly insulted the President by meeting with Bill Clinton’s worst enemies, televangelists Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson.

Netanyahu carried out this affront over the objections of both President Clinton and moderate Jewish leaders in the United States.

The question must be asked: Was the set-up of President Clinton part of the effort by the Likud fanatics in Israel, and their “Temple Mount” backers in London, to punish the President for his efforts to force through an implementation of the 1993 Oslo peace accords?

The Real Lewinsky Tapes British investigative journalist Kevin Dowling has released an article for publication to a variety of British and American news organizations, charging that the Israeli Mossad was bugging the Watergate apartment telephone of Monica Lewinsky, and was able to obtain material used to blackmail the Clinton administration into shutting down a probe of widespread Israeli espionage in Washington.

Dowling reports that well-placed sources in Tel Aviv say that full transcripts of more than 30 sexually explicit conversations between Clinton and Lewinsky are held by the Israeli foreign intelligence service, the Mossad.

The backdrop is as follows, Dowling reports, and it is backed up by published sources in the U.S., that the U.S. government was aware, from late 1995 on, that the Mossad was carrying out extensive espionage activity in the United States. When the Defense Investigative Service issued a warning to defense contractors about the Israeli spy program, the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith went into an all-out mobilization to denounce the DIS memo as “anti-Semitic.” Of course, just one year earlier, the ADL had been the subject of a lengthy espionage probe by the FBI and the San Francisco Police; and the ADL had earlier been deeply implicated in the Jonathan Pollard spy affair.

In May of 1997, the Washington Post and other media reported that the U.S. National Security Agency had intercepted a phone conversation between a Mossad officer posted at the Israeli embassy in Washington, and Danny Yaton, the Mossad chief, in Tel Aviv, during January 1997. The Mossad agent was seeking clarification whether he should attempt to obtain a copy of private letter from then-Secretary of State Warren Christopher to Yassir Arafat, via a Mossad mole high-up in the Clinton administration codenamed “Mega.” [allegedly Rahm Emanual - ed.] The Mossad boss told the agent that under no circumstances should “Mega” be approached, as he/she was the top Israeli penetration agent inside the Clinton inner circle. An extensive FBI counterintelligence probe to determine the identity of the high-level Israeli mole in the U.S. government was triggered by the NSA intercept.

Comparisons to the Pollard spy affair were naturally raised; the deeper issue is that many observers believe that Pollard’s controller (sometimes referred to as “Mr.. X,” or the “X Committee”) is still burrowed deep in a high-level position in a U.S. government agency.

According to the Tel Aviv sources cited by Dowling, there was an emergency meeting of top Israeli intelligence officials, as soon as the NSA intercept was discovered; a Mossad electronic-bugging team of yalohim was dispatched to Washington, and one of the targets of their operation was the home telephone of Monica Lewinsky.

According to the Dowling sources, the Mossad obtained wiretap tapes of at least 30 X-rated conversations between the President and Lewinsky. These tapes, according to the sources, were hand-carried back to Tel Aviv, and were then used to blackmail the Clinton administration into calling off the search for “Mega”; the threat was that if the search for “Mega” were not shut down, the Israelis would begin leaking material from the tapes.

According to Michael Isikoff, the reporter who first started investigating the Lewinsky story, he first learned about a story involving the President and “an intern” in March-April of 1997.

The Dowling story is consistent with many leads assembled by this news service over the past several years, suggesting that the Israelis were operating against the Clinton Presidency in underhanded ways, as well as in an overt policy was, to sabotage the Middle East peace process.

It should not be overlooked that the appellate attorney for convicted spy Jonathan Pollard was Theodore Olson–Kenneth Starr’s long-time colleague and close friend, and host of the “Get Clinton” salon. Olson was still Pollard’s lawyer as late as 1993, when Olson was already launching the anti-Clinton “Arkansas Project” with the American Spectator magazine and Richard Mellon Scaife’s money–out of which operation came the Whitewater investigation and the Paula Jones case.

On 9/14/98, during a White House press conference, a reporter asked Mike McCurry , “Is it true that the White House is bugged by a foreign country?”

McCurry said he had no comment on that and moved on to other things.

It is known that Bill Clinton ordered the FBI to stop searching for a White House mole code-named “Mega”.The prevailing story is that Clinton was being blackmailed by a recording of Bill having phone sex with Monica Lewinsky. It’s now known that the Israeli owned companies providing billing and tapping sevices were well positioned to intercept any and all phone calls going into Monica’s Watergate apartment, as well as all phone calls in and out of the secure White House communications system.

So all this brouhaha took place because Israel, under Netanyahu, wanted to sabotage the peace process, the same as today. And very strangely, it looks like we will have another confrontation coming up with many of the same players in a matter of weeks. Do Hillary and Bill, currently under extreme duress due to the financial corruption being exposed and liable to throw Bush Sr. et. al. under the bus to save their own skins, despise Netanyahu for setting them up? If that’s true, the upcoming clash between Israel and the Obama Administration could have a very high popcorn factor. Hillary Clinton, in particular, would have ample motivation to go for Bibi’s jugular. And should her courage fail her for some reason, the unraveling financial corruption scandal dangles the threat of jail over her head.

I must be imagining all of this. It’s just too wild to contemplate how these planets are lining up. We are potentially looking at some of the most treacherous people in the world being pitted against each other.

Psychopaths for Treasury

Nov 10

Posted by Marlena in Corruption & Crime, Obama/Biden | No Comments

Michael Chossudovsky has an analysis up at Global Research full of grim truths about the people who engineered this economic catastrophe — who happen to be the same people, by the way, under consideration for new positions in the Obama administration.

Summers, Geithner, Corzine, Volker, Fischer, Phil Gramm, Bernanke, Hank Paulson, Rubin, not to mention Alan Greenspan, al al. are buddies; they play golf together; they have links to the Council on Foreign Relations and the Bilderberg; they act concurrently in accordance with the interests of Wall Street; they meet behind closed doors; they are on the same wave length; they are Democrats and Republicans. While they may disagree on some issues, they are firmly committed to the Washington-Wall Street Consensus. They are utterly ruthless in their management of economic and financial processes. Their actions are profit driven. Outside of their narrow interest in the “efficiency” of “markets”, they have little concern for “living human beings”. How are people’s lives affected by the deadly gamut of macro-economic and financial reforms, which is spearheading entire sectors of economic activity into bankruptcy.

The economic reasoning underlying neoliberal economic discourse is often cynical and contemptuous. In this regard, Lawrence Summers’ economic discourse stands out. He is known among environmentalists for having proposed the dumping of toxic waste in Third World countries, because people in poor countries have shorter lives and the costs of labor are abysmally low, which essentially means that the market value of people in the Third World is much lower. According to Summers, this makes it far more “cost effective” to export toxic materials to impoverished countries. A controversial 1991 World Bank memo signed by of Chief Economist Larry Summers reads as follows (excerpts, emphasis added):

DATE: December 12, 1991 TO: Distribution FR: Lawrence H. Summers Subject: GEP

“‘Dirty’ Industries: Just between you and me, shouldn’t the World Bank be encouraging MORE migration of the dirty industries to the Less Developed Countries? I can think of three reasons:

1) The measurements of the costs of health impairing pollution depends on the foregone earnings from increased morbidity and mortality…. From this point of view a given amount of health impairing pollution should be done in the country with the lowest cost, which will be the country with the lowest wages. I think the economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest wage country is impeccable and we should face up to that.

2) The costs of pollution are likely to be non-linear as the initial increments of pollution probably have very low cost. I’ve always though that under-populated countries in Africa are vastly UNDER-polluted, their air quality is probably vastly inefficiently low compared to Los Angeles or Mexico City. Only the lamentable facts that so much pollution is generated by non-tradable industries (transport, electrical generation) and that the unit transport costs of solid waste are so high prevent world welfare enhancing trade in air pollution and waste.

3) The demand for a clean environment for aesthetic and health reasons is likely to have very high income elasticity. [the demand increases when income levels increase]. The concern over an agent that causes a one in a million change in the odds of prostrate cancer is obviously going to be much higher in a country where people survive to get prostrate cancer than in a country where under 5 mortality is is 200 per thousand…. “

http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/envronmt/summers.htm

 

‘Ruthless’ doesn’t do this guy justice.

Summers stance on the export of pollution to developing countries had a marked impact on US environmental policy:

In 1994, “virtually every country in the world broke with Mr. Summers’ Harvard-trained “economic logic” ruminations about dumping rich countries’ poisons on their poorer neighbors, and agreed to ban the export of hazardous wastes from OECD to non-OECD [developing] countries under the Basel Convention. Five years later, the United States is one of the few countries that has yet to ratify the Basel Convention or the Basel Convention’s Ban Amendment on the export of hazardous wastes from OECD to non-OECD countries. (Jim Valette, Larry Summers’ War Against the Earth, Counterpunch, undated)

These Basel Conventions play an key role in the unfolding financial crisis, which of course explains why the US does not want to ratify them. It also explains why nobody ever discusses them in the corporate media. But other countries have grown sick and tired of US corruption, and they have tried to put some limits back into the system.

Because, apparently, destroying the world means nothing to Larry Summers if he can make money in the process.

No servant can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money. Luke 16:13